England's cavalier batting throughout the entire Trent Bridge match beggared belief. Hence the pages of opinions in the newspapers since. Over two innings Joe Root's team occupied the crease for fewer overs than South Africa managed in each of theirs. Most of the wickets lost by England were self-inflicted: the work, you might reasonably presume, of masochists.

The duty of a batsman is to score runs. To do this he must stay at the crease. To do that he must preserve his wicket. The notion of being "positive" - a misleading buzzword for modern cricketers - is fine if applied as the opposite of negative but not so healthy if it is used to encourage reckless play. In the art of batting, the percentages matter. Being positive no more means pushing hard at straight balls pitched on a good length than it does an ill-conceived aerial assault. The defence applied by most of England's top players was negligent to say the least. It appeared to be beyond the means of some of the best players in the land to simply block the ball, in the true sense of "thou shalt not pass". This led to a debate about how much they cared.

Then you stop to think harder and quickly appreciate how very much England's cricketers care and how Joe Root in particular is hurting. Then you remind yourself how quickly these things change. We are all subject to the emotional fallout from a disastrous performance. The ownership of, and investment into, a sporting team is widespread. Almost certainly, if they hurt, the rest of us hurt.

The duty of a batsman is to score runs. To do this he must stay at the crease. To do that he must preserve his wicket

After the first match, at Lord's, South Africa were all but written off. The supporters, both here and back home, talked of everything from government intervention and misguided cricket administration, to injuries, desertions, sabbaticals and new-born babies. The future, most from the republic agreed, was bleak and the downward spiral of international sport in the republic was accelerating. The critics suggested that Test cricket had become a diminished priority, especially in the light of the London launch of the new South African T20 Global League (a name of splendid self-aggrandisement) that overrode the needs of first-class cricket and, more particularly, the Test team. The facts, rather than the emotions, were that big scores had dried up, bowlers had lost discipline and catches were being shelled with embarrassing consequences. That's an ugly list of failings for a cricket team. Everyone harped on about the absence of AB de Villiers, Dale Steyn and Faf du Plesssis, not to mention the Kolpak crew who had jumped ship for the good life and pots of gold to be found in the shires of England.

Then Faf du Plessis arrived after the complicated birth of his first child and immediately, as if the fairy godmother had waved her wand, the story took a U-turn. We don't have to be magicians to beat this England team, said the magician, we just have to get the basics right and apply them. He spoke with admirable conviction, much as he had done in Australia last winter before the first Test in Perth and then again during the inquiry into the mint-infused saliva he applied to the ball. He is right that his team did not require supernatural powers to win at Trent Bridge but he modestly refuses to accept that his own leadership is well out of the ordinary.

Frankly, South Africa looked a completely different side, even without Kasigo Rabada. The batsmen adapted to the conditions of the day and the requirements of the moment. The bowlers hit their mark and their straps. The fielders caught everything. Du Plessis was both everywhere and everyman, but never theatrical or bombastic. You had to look to find him but there was no missing the steel in his batsmen, the intelligent improvement in his bowlers or the crafty placement of his fielders.

For all the efforts of Vernon Philander, Hashim Amla and the others, the man of the build-up to the match, and of the match itself, was the South African captain. It is a difficult job, one vacated by Hashim Amla and AB de Villiers. Du Plessis follows in the line of Graeme Smith, neither the best nor most fluent cricketer, but a man blessed with the right mind to process all the complications, frustrations and demands, and come up with a clear way forward.

Which, of course, is what Root must do this week. Find a way forward. He faces a problem of perception. T20 cricket is thrown down the throats of everyone in the country who picks up a bat. The patience required for Test cricket is hardly modern-day box office, T20 is box office times two. The England batsmen are fabulous ball-strikers, the proof of which can be seen in the two shorter forms of the game and in the myriad brief innings that light up the Test match arena before opponents snuff them out. England have lost seven out of their last ten Test matches.

The defence applied by most of England's top players was negligent to say the least. It appeared to be beyond the means of some of the best players in the land to simply block the ball, in the true sense of "thou shalt not pass"

Clearly enough, the batsmen aren't making the runs they can. To do so they have to buy into a more thoughtful approach that reacts to the pitch, weather and game situation. They have to show patience when need be, while still looking to pounce on opportunities when they arise. Even Root, whose 190 was mainly brilliant, was twice missed early in his innings at Lord's, having taken the attacking option. These are not the words of a spoilsport. All the truly great players have a defence. To see Viv Richards play a forward defensive shot was to recognise the strength of his mind. To watch Brian Lara absorb the bowling during the first 40 minutes he was at the wicket was to understand the construction of an innings. To witness Ricky Ponting, resolute and ruthless in both defence and attack, was to understand how damn important it was to him.

The England dressing room holds Alastair Cook in high regard. It is high time they learned something from the limits he imposes upon himself and the calm sense of authority that is the stand-out quality in his best batting. This is not to say that everyone should bat like Cook, only that they should think more like him.

One upside to the galling nature of the Trent Bridge defeat is that Test cricket is the talk of the town. Even casual observers want to know why a winning team becomes a shocker overnight. Certainly, whether consciously or subconsciously, England took South Africa too lightly. Now, people will tune in to see if the new captain and his men are able to do anything about it.

It is infuriating, and a concern, to see the salivation over T20 cricket. The fanfare that came with the recent television rights deal was all about the new city-based T20 competition, which is England's crack at the Big Bash that has won new audiences in Australia. There is risk involved with the English version but it is worth taking for the potential in new audiences as much as anything else. The key is to ensure it is not the only show in town. T20 promotes itself, so much so that successful players have begun to belief their own myth. This illusion is damaging the art of batting because, in T20, the loss of your wicket doesn't matter much at all.

The ECB, the various media, the players and the teams of extras that surround them must start to prod, push, prevaricate and persuade on the subject of Test cricket. The space for those huge T20 posters across the metropolis and the glitzy ads in the provinces must be shared with hardcore promotion of Test cricket. The five-day game needs to sound more important than it does at present and the ECB must shout the loudest and spend the most money in its favour.

The foundation of this game we love is the longest form. Upon that foundation is built everything else. The players appear to have been distracted from these simple but hugely relevant facts. For Test cricket to be played well, due care and attention is required. England have the talent, masses of it, but the loss of direction at Trent Bridge needs an immediate and faithful response. This is a lifelong love affair - a relationship that needs work if it is to be sustained - and we are all responsible for it. This is not a one-night stand.

Mark Nicholas, the former Hampshire captain, presents the cricket on Channel Nine in Australia and Channel 5 in the UK

Having watched the English top order batsmen, Jennings, Westley and Malan, imo that only Westley shows a test match ability. I feel that Hameed should be recalled at number two

Cricinfouser
on July 23, 2017, 13:29 GMT

"The duty of a batsman is to score runs. To do this he must stay at the crease. To do that he must preserve his wicket" - Mark, I normally enjoy your writing but that has to be the most asinine thing you've ever written. Remember its a bowlers "duty" to take wickets as well - that's why it's a contest. If batsmen never got out wouldn't be much of a sport would it?

Iman
on July 20, 2017, 19:42 GMT

Hasib Hameed has serious technical issues against the short ball. It was first brought to notice in a practice match England played against Bangladesh. Taskin Ahmed peppered him with some short stuff and he looked uncomfortable. The Indian team management picked up on that a little later, and when they did, a much quicker Umesh Yadav went after him and made him hop. In that aforementioned innings as well he was jumping and fending Umesh Yadav's short balls, and was hit many times on the arm and body before one fractured his finger. On a subcontinent track, he was like a cat on a hot tin roof against short stuff from a fast bowlers, if he opens next match and the track is even remotely similar to English conditions, he would be a Canon fodder in front of Rabada Morris and company. Word travels fast in international cricket, and I am sure a side like South Africa would have done their homework. He's a talented bloke, with good temperament. And still very young. So there's enough time for him to work on his technique and improve, but under current circumstances, there's no point in exposing him to this South African attack at the top and further jeopardise his already doubtful career. Let him play county cricket for a few more seasons and work on the lacuna. Because unless he does, with his abilities against short ball, I don't see a long successful career in test match cricket for him.

junaid7140064
on July 20, 2017, 12:22 GMT

The only team in the world who know how to play real and traditional Test cricket is Pakistan look at them they never had any batting collapse because they don't treat test cricket as T20 everyone should learn from them

Jose
on July 20, 2017, 11:57 GMT

@IAN on July 20, 2017, 10:45 GMT

Modern cricket, they say, has evolved.

Like in Darwin's theory of evolution!

But, looks more like"Neo Darwinism".

The survival of the fattest (at least in terms of the pay cheques)!

Most of the fat on the bacon is luring from the bacon of the short formats.

And, it gets magnified as soon as someone grabs the fattest paycheck at the end of highly publicised auctions. Those glittering stories get posted in social media by zillions of posters. When such great stories get pasted on every glamorous wall-poster & sports magazine, it is only natural for the very young eyes, to pop out, looking only for those skills needed to get the balls for 'maximums'; doesn't matter whether they are from the sweet spots or bitter edges. In such an exciting world, why bother holding straight bats and learning forward defense?

Let me stop, before I get kicked out of any cricket stadium I may step in, like a white ball sailing over the roofs to the nearest car park!

paul.r8086736
on July 20, 2017, 11:31 GMT

@jamesn4081647. Great point 3 defensive batsemen in the top 3, and they regularly fail to be bailed out by a partnership between Stokes and Ali, or Bairstow and Ali (or someone else). It's technique against the new ball that seems to be the main failing.

rynelr8107044
on July 20, 2017, 10:49 GMT

FAF best captain since Smith and should remain captain in all formats, great leadership skills and makes the right decisions and gets the best out of his players

ian
on July 20, 2017, 10:45 GMT

Shishir: A thoughtful analysis of England's current top order. I think the advent of t20 has had some influence on England's batsmen, but not purely on the criterion of temperament. It is, perhaps, a little more subtle than that. It is, possibly, to do with the change in technique that has come with playing sf (specifically t20) cricket. There is an obvious inability to play a long innings when the bowling is genuine Test quality, as SA's attack most certainly is. The white ball does little after four overs or so, and playing against skilled practitioners with the red ball demands a good defensive technique - the least practised mode of batting these days. Test cricket offers no hiding place; two top order wickets in quick succession change a game drastically. The coach doesn't help; he has no real grasp of Test match disciplines. If there are bowler-friendly conditions, a lunch score of 80-1 is so much better than 110-3, but this Eng. side is far more likely to get the latter!

Shane
on July 20, 2017, 10:39 GMT

@JAMESN4081647 - "our top 3, who are all defensive, consistently fail". I'm not an England supporter, but have you heard of a guy called Alistair Cook?

jamesn4081647
on July 20, 2017, 10:10 GMT

Bizarre saying England need to have more 'test match' batsmen, when our top 3, who are all defensive, consistently fail and are bailed out by our aggressive middle and lower order.

Cricinfouser
on August 7, 2017, 17:49 GMT

Having watched the English top order batsmen, Jennings, Westley and Malan, imo that only Westley shows a test match ability. I feel that Hameed should be recalled at number two

Cricinfouser
on July 23, 2017, 13:29 GMT

"The duty of a batsman is to score runs. To do this he must stay at the crease. To do that he must preserve his wicket" - Mark, I normally enjoy your writing but that has to be the most asinine thing you've ever written. Remember its a bowlers "duty" to take wickets as well - that's why it's a contest. If batsmen never got out wouldn't be much of a sport would it?

Iman
on July 20, 2017, 19:42 GMT

Hasib Hameed has serious technical issues against the short ball. It was first brought to notice in a practice match England played against Bangladesh. Taskin Ahmed peppered him with some short stuff and he looked uncomfortable. The Indian team management picked up on that a little later, and when they did, a much quicker Umesh Yadav went after him and made him hop. In that aforementioned innings as well he was jumping and fending Umesh Yadav's short balls, and was hit many times on the arm and body before one fractured his finger. On a subcontinent track, he was like a cat on a hot tin roof against short stuff from a fast bowlers, if he opens next match and the track is even remotely similar to English conditions, he would be a Canon fodder in front of Rabada Morris and company. Word travels fast in international cricket, and I am sure a side like South Africa would have done their homework. He's a talented bloke, with good temperament. And still very young. So there's enough time for him to work on his technique and improve, but under current circumstances, there's no point in exposing him to this South African attack at the top and further jeopardise his already doubtful career. Let him play county cricket for a few more seasons and work on the lacuna. Because unless he does, with his abilities against short ball, I don't see a long successful career in test match cricket for him.

junaid7140064
on July 20, 2017, 12:22 GMT

The only team in the world who know how to play real and traditional Test cricket is Pakistan look at them they never had any batting collapse because they don't treat test cricket as T20 everyone should learn from them

Jose
on July 20, 2017, 11:57 GMT

@IAN on July 20, 2017, 10:45 GMT

Modern cricket, they say, has evolved.

Like in Darwin's theory of evolution!

But, looks more like"Neo Darwinism".

The survival of the fattest (at least in terms of the pay cheques)!

Most of the fat on the bacon is luring from the bacon of the short formats.

And, it gets magnified as soon as someone grabs the fattest paycheck at the end of highly publicised auctions. Those glittering stories get posted in social media by zillions of posters. When such great stories get pasted on every glamorous wall-poster & sports magazine, it is only natural for the very young eyes, to pop out, looking only for those skills needed to get the balls for 'maximums'; doesn't matter whether they are from the sweet spots or bitter edges. In such an exciting world, why bother holding straight bats and learning forward defense?

Let me stop, before I get kicked out of any cricket stadium I may step in, like a white ball sailing over the roofs to the nearest car park!

paul.r8086736
on July 20, 2017, 11:31 GMT

@jamesn4081647. Great point 3 defensive batsemen in the top 3, and they regularly fail to be bailed out by a partnership between Stokes and Ali, or Bairstow and Ali (or someone else). It's technique against the new ball that seems to be the main failing.

rynelr8107044
on July 20, 2017, 10:49 GMT

FAF best captain since Smith and should remain captain in all formats, great leadership skills and makes the right decisions and gets the best out of his players

ian
on July 20, 2017, 10:45 GMT

Shishir: A thoughtful analysis of England's current top order. I think the advent of t20 has had some influence on England's batsmen, but not purely on the criterion of temperament. It is, perhaps, a little more subtle than that. It is, possibly, to do with the change in technique that has come with playing sf (specifically t20) cricket. There is an obvious inability to play a long innings when the bowling is genuine Test quality, as SA's attack most certainly is. The white ball does little after four overs or so, and playing against skilled practitioners with the red ball demands a good defensive technique - the least practised mode of batting these days. Test cricket offers no hiding place; two top order wickets in quick succession change a game drastically. The coach doesn't help; he has no real grasp of Test match disciplines. If there are bowler-friendly conditions, a lunch score of 80-1 is so much better than 110-3, but this Eng. side is far more likely to get the latter!

Shane
on July 20, 2017, 10:39 GMT

@JAMESN4081647 - "our top 3, who are all defensive, consistently fail". I'm not an England supporter, but have you heard of a guy called Alistair Cook?

jamesn4081647
on July 20, 2017, 10:10 GMT

Bizarre saying England need to have more 'test match' batsmen, when our top 3, who are all defensive, consistently fail and are bailed out by our aggressive middle and lower order.

James C Birbeck Dar
on July 20, 2017, 10:05 GMT

You have to wonder how long AB will stay captain of the ODI team. Faf strikes me as an excellent leader. De Villiers is probably best off concentrating on the things he does well.

Shane
on July 20, 2017, 10:05 GMT

@ANAND VANCHI - jeez, settle down sport. Don't you have some mediocre team you support that you could go read about?

paul.r8086736
on July 20, 2017, 9:22 GMT

@ John? Bopara and Monty were handled perfectly well. Poor Monty had a break down of sorts that had nothing to do with cricket though it manifested on field and with his club(s). If anything the ECB went out of their way to protect him and encourage his recovery at considerable time and cost. Hameed was pencilled in for these tests ahead of Jennings if the press and rumours are to be believed. However, back playing FC cricket this early Summer his form has been poor, averaging less than 20 with the bat. I'm sure with hard work he'll be back.

Jasper
on July 20, 2017, 9:18 GMT

Andrew, in the past 11 years the Proteas have lost only 4 of 37 test series. Of the 4 lost series , strangely they lost only once on foreign soil. Two of the losses came in a single season (2015/2016), against India in India and against England at home. The other two series losses were both against Australia, way back in 08/09 and more recently in 2013. Of the 4 losses only one was a runaway victory for the opposition, the Indian series in 2015 (3-0). The other 3 losses were all lost 2-1. Thats a pretty decent record.

Shishir
on July 20, 2017, 8:43 GMT

Mark, a good article, but it's unfortunately a bit of a rant against T20. It seems people in England at least feel that the root of all ills is T20. Let's take this player by player.
1. Cook: Proper test batsman, so T20 has not effect on his dismissals; 2. Jennings: Newbie. Never proved himself after that debut century; 3. Ballance: Never a great player (even when T20 wasn't this "big"), so non-issue; 4. Root: Has always played well even though he has been aggressive (even in this match, he played well); 5. Bairstow: Could have played better (T20 influence? Not sure because he's not that kind of a cricketer)

6. Stokes: Every great all rounder worth salt from time anon, has been aggressive (Sobers, Botham, Kapil, Imran, Hadlee). Kallis was the only exception. And teams need such players; 7. Moin Khan: Only in his case, I guess, aggression is making a difference many a time. The rest are bowlers

@Mark Nicholas - Just a small point. Isn't it Kagiso Rabada rather than Kasigo Rabada? I've noticed you say this on commentary too.

John
on July 20, 2017, 8:05 GMT

Where's the prodigy Hameed ?
Hope they dont handle him like Bopara and Monty.

cricfan4424127130
on July 20, 2017, 6:50 GMT

England have a problem with both batting & bowling. Take away Cook/Root and they have no test quality players. Take away Anderson/Broad and they have no bowlers either!

ian
on July 20, 2017, 6:33 GMT

A good and thoughtful article, as you'd expect. Mark Nicholas doesn't explicitly state it - there is a degree of ECB culpability in the inability of England's long list of batsmen to show the necessary application and/or technique: since the appointment of Trevor Bayliss, the likes of Tom Harrison and Andrew Strauss have made it clear that England is going to focus and promote its white-ball teams and look to make England World Cup winners in 2019. With this mindset, everything else, implicitly, is of less importance. That leaves TC, and its legion of dyed-in-the-wool supporters, feeling that they have been slighted. Is it not possible for England to have twin objectives? No one has told Bayliss, a man without the time to even rock up and watch a few days of CC to get a feel for some of the likely Test players. He is a white ball coach; red ball is not his bag -and it shows! Give the Test team to Paul Farbrace, and tell TB to leave Test team well alone. He does it no favours.

b.misl9017082
on July 20, 2017, 6:16 GMT

Nice article Nico!!

Sadly T20 is a necessary evil, outside of Aust/Eng it's probably the only format that brings numbers to a ground. Test matches in most countries are played in practically empty stadiums which is a sad truth.

If T20 died tomorrow I'd be the happiest man alive, but my gut feel is test cricket wouldn't be far behind it.

Stephen
on July 20, 2017, 6:08 GMT

As a South African was incredibly priveleged to have watched the Saturday at Trent Bridge,if that didn"t showcase the beauty of Test cricket then I am lost.It is without a doubt the best format of the game!!!!!!!

Venkatesh Venkatesh
on July 20, 2017, 6:08 GMT

Certainly SA applied to the task & won the match that is story behind their success in this test match whereas England does not have quality batsman to play SA pace attack in particular & spin except Root rest does not look like test batsman at all & their bowling they depended upon Anderson & Board and of course toss made lot difference .SA made two changes one was evitable & the other on performance, SA captain led his side very well & whereas Root captaincy not all inspiring that made the difference . It is not question positive or negative England approach to the game led to their downfall nothing else .20-20 cricket approach does not made any difference & let me know barring Strokes no body in England team play cricket which fits that shortest version of the game .SA played well & deserves to win that's all that should be accepted. Reasons after debacle is nothing but itching the heavy bruise. Mark your theory is not all convincing

Cricinfouser
on July 20, 2017, 6:07 GMT

Every team can have a bad session or a bad day or as in this case a bad test. Having a bad test when you've been totally outplayed has happened to all teams. SA were good but did not force England to self destructed without a fight, this day did "willingly", which is why there are so many questions.

Andrew
on July 20, 2017, 5:14 GMT

SA has won in the region of 36 of their last 48 test series. Thats a pretty good record. The recent record against England is pretty even. The rest of this series should be a cracker.

Andrew
on July 20, 2017, 4:55 GMT

SA's success in this test has as much to do with Amlas return to form as it does with Faf's captaincy. We can still improve a lot. Bavuma needs to be more circumspect. Someone needs to support Elgar. And we need to grab the catches that come our way, but we are a strong team and with the right resolve, we'll beat anyone. T20 be damned. Theres nothing like test cricket in any sport in the world.

Anupam
on July 20, 2017, 4:54 GMT

It's a tad unfair on a team which just won the first test match and the series is still not decided. The aggressive approach everyone is criticizing has yield them wonders across formats and made this English team lovable by all fans, compare that to the boring teams of 90's and 00's. Their is always a risk with such approach but England will reap more rewards, and i am sure on the way batsman will be able to find that thin line b/w aggressive and assertive. They lost 4 out of last 7 matches in India, if you look at their batting, they did well in all matches but India was always able to find a way to win. I agree though they need to find a couple of good batsman, but they are trying, they have given opportunities to Ballance (look at his county performance) Hameed, Jennings (scored a century on debut), and need to give fair chances to these guys before finding new ones!!

Anand Vanchi
on July 20, 2017, 4:53 GMT

ha ha ha!!! couldnt control laughing when i saw this sentence in the article. "Even casual observers want to know why a winning team becomes a shocker overnight" .
How do u call England test team a winning team when it has lost 7 out of the last ten tests it has played??? Acutally it is a "shocker" that they won the 1st test in Lords . :-)

JAYARAMAN
on July 20, 2017, 1:21 GMT

In England and Australia, there are good crowd in Tests compared to other Test playing countries. These later countries can allow spectators with lowest admission ticket prices and free entry for school children.

Alex
on July 19, 2017, 23:11 GMT

When things go wrong everyone blame everything so they can be correct in one thing. Nasty business these ex cricketers do. Trent bridge supported SA's strength more than england that gives perception of england were bad side. If pitch spins same england team walk over SA with abandon even with maharaj in them. Maharaj is not effective in truly spinning wicket because he feel pressure of taking wicket and lose control. England had blue print lord test match and they have to do same. Dry spinning pitch in england with two spinners operating. wow. Key is who is their second spinner. I bring leech. Who care about character. just win the game for england. i never believe in expert's opinion. Humans are always wrong anyway all the time. if it is right his brain will be stopped. In order for us to live we must be wrong all the time. It makes his life exciting. I do think bairstow should be captain. You have to use all tools in your armoury and root is not capable in that only in strategy.

Cricinfouser
on July 19, 2017, 22:12 GMT

T20 is the devils spawn. It is a suitable format for school and low level league cricket - it is no test of anything. It is like a sugary drink - an instant rush for the ignorant masses but it rots the teeth and eventually the whole body.

rdarli1119786
on July 19, 2017, 21:49 GMT

As Mark says, genius players of the ilk of Lara (flamboyant) and Viv (attacking but very compact and classical) could wear down good bowling early on and then go on to dominate. They were so gifted that they were instinctively good at everything they did, including defence. I'd like to mention another star player of years gone by - Gordon Greenidge. What a batsman. To watch him blunt the new ball attack in those days - when every team had one or two champion swing and seam bowlers - was an education. He would get forward, and with angled bat and soft hands play late, close to the body, thus smothering the swing. Even when he edged it (inevitable occasionally given how the likes of Hadlee and Botham could hoop the ball around), the ball often did not carry to slips. And once he was set, few batsmen were more devastating; he could match Viv stroke for stroke.

Cricinfouser
on July 19, 2017, 20:59 GMT

If teams require an example of test match batting , determination , grit, never say die attitude and character then they should watch SA over the last decade....They have staged some amazing and memorable comebacks. Against Aus, India, Srilanka and England, Those were epics.

Peter
on July 19, 2017, 20:57 GMT

I agree with the article. The England batsmen are not lacking in skill or ability. Nor, I assume, intelligence. However, it doesn't take a genius to recognise that the batters are playing a different game from Test match cricket. In Test match cricket occupation of the crease is a necessary feature. No matter how quickly runs are scored if you're not there long enough to build a good total (a minimum of 350, and preferably nearer to 450) you will lose more matches than you win.

wayne
on July 19, 2017, 20:46 GMT

If there's one good thing that comes out of the growing trend to play "positive" cricket with a big target in the 4th innings, it's that we get to more deeply appreciate how much skill actually goes into attritional cricket. We see it so rarely these days (even rarer that it pays off), that when it does happen, it's a thing to behold. My continental colleagues can't seem to grasp why I would watch 6 hours of nothing but dead-bat, no matter how many times i say "This...THIS is cricket."

Paul
on July 19, 2017, 20:37 GMT

Agree wit hyour article Mark, except for one small detail: His name is Kagiso Rabada, not Kasigo Rabada.

divynl6307086
on July 19, 2017, 20:05 GMT

This rich discussion on England's horror show reminds me of the talk of strike-rotation and positive cricket thrown around by the Indian skipper after Pujara failed to bat at Kohli's expected strike rate. However, when India needed someone to save their test, they fell back on boring cricket played by Pujara, as shown in the third game vs Australia earlier this year (who btw was also able to outpace his skipper in the scoring department in quite a few partnerships). He was sturdy, strong, good test match batsman through the season, where India won games often by grinding out opposition and not blowing them apart. Somehow get the feeling Bayliss finds himself better in the groove when England are in coloured kits, would have made a great pair with MS Dhoni, who too seemed to switch off in tests esp. when touring. But I think too early to call of this series, England will strike back well. Though Faf the mastermind is a bigger challenge than England's brand of cricket

Allan
on July 19, 2017, 19:52 GMT

Mark you are intent on taking cricketers back to the past when they worked for free. There is not as much money in Test match cricket as there is in T20 cricket. At the end of the day", or should I say at stumps, money will have the final say.

Jon
on July 19, 2017, 19:19 GMT

I absolutely love the aggressive approach in ODI and T20. Bayliss has modernised the side and made them competitive in limited overs. However Test and limited overs are very different. Cook is a nailed on selection for tests and should have been dropped from ODIs many years earlier than he was, different games. Seeing Bairstow and Stokes batting so high in Tests was a bit surreal.

Shay
on July 19, 2017, 19:19 GMT

@nmehal - That's ODI

nmehal0608822
on July 19, 2017, 19:09 GMT

@SHAY when england won their 1st match in south afica,thry said saffas are poor starters.result=2-1 for wngland.when saffas lost their 1st match of ODIs and T20s ,this tour,you said saffas are poor starters and the result is 2-1 loss in both series.

GANESSIN
on July 19, 2017, 18:01 GMT

Eng lack quality when it comes to test batting. they dont have batsman averaging around 50 other than Root and Cook. They miss KP in this regards. Its a 2 batsmen team. Hence Root/Cook failures will come to haunt them. Root/Cook cant bail out the team in every match.

PJ
on July 19, 2017, 17:58 GMT

T20 is killing test cricket, on the field and off it.

When we all come clean on that we might at least have a sensible discussion about how to put it to sleep in the best manner possible.

Shay
on July 19, 2017, 17:45 GMT

SA are poor series starters. ENG Lords win was over exaggerated. Cook has always looked the deal

michae7471641
on July 19, 2017, 17:30 GMT

I agree with these observations. It should also be emphasised that the management of this team could do a lot more to demonstrate that they value the skills exhibited in the county championship. I think it's absolutely disgraceful that Bayliss, by his own admission, has never seen either Stoneman or Westley bat. It sends out completely the wrong message when these players are relying on journalists and broadcasters to rally their personal causes. It also devalues the main domestic competition that most closely resembles Test cricket in England, which has become increasingly marginalised by shorter versions of the game that generate more income for the ECB. You reap what you sow.

Stephen
on July 19, 2017, 17:23 GMT

England had four specialist batsman in the test - FOUR! Not rocket science. Play another batsman. Is there no one who averages over 40 at first class level?

sam
on July 19, 2017, 16:24 GMT

Sorry to say but Lara had a very iffy defence. He might well be the second greatest batsman of all time (after Bradman) but the reason he averages just above 50 rather than around 60-65 is simply because he got out so often early before settling down. In that aspect two contemporaries of his time Kallis and Dravid had an excellent defence and so they had lesser no. of early failures even though they were quite defensive. Even Lara's good friend and adversary Tendulkar had a much better defence than him. Even Ponting had a little iffy defence when he started his innings; like Lara as he got set the defence got better. I didn't watch Viv live; so won't comment.

des
on July 19, 2017, 16:10 GMT

Let's face it, England's scouting is not what it was. Is Jennings the best young talent that SA has to offer? It's a bit like Wenger, who used to grab gems from the French market but now ends up with duds.

gamont7503123
on July 19, 2017, 14:47 GMT

If a Zimbabwe or a West indies lose seven of their last ten tests they are deemed unworthy of test status. ET TU ENGLAND/

adityagoel07
on July 19, 2017, 14:06 GMT

Well written. It is time that England understand that their cavalier approach at all times won't work. It will work only in limited over games, that too on absolute flat tracks, where they can just clear their front legs and play across the line with ease.
All English batters should take a leaf (or leaves) out of Cook's book of batsmanship, and then apply themselves. There is a reason why Test cricket is called 'Test' cricket. And if England continue in the same vein as they have been doing till now, the time is not far when their test game will face the same fate as their ODI game was facing till after the 2015 WC.

No featured comments at the moment.

adityagoel07
on July 19, 2017, 14:06 GMT

Well written. It is time that England understand that their cavalier approach at all times won't work. It will work only in limited over games, that too on absolute flat tracks, where they can just clear their front legs and play across the line with ease.
All English batters should take a leaf (or leaves) out of Cook's book of batsmanship, and then apply themselves. There is a reason why Test cricket is called 'Test' cricket. And if England continue in the same vein as they have been doing till now, the time is not far when their test game will face the same fate as their ODI game was facing till after the 2015 WC.

gamont7503123
on July 19, 2017, 14:47 GMT

If a Zimbabwe or a West indies lose seven of their last ten tests they are deemed unworthy of test status. ET TU ENGLAND/

des
on July 19, 2017, 16:10 GMT

Let's face it, England's scouting is not what it was. Is Jennings the best young talent that SA has to offer? It's a bit like Wenger, who used to grab gems from the French market but now ends up with duds.

sam
on July 19, 2017, 16:24 GMT

Sorry to say but Lara had a very iffy defence. He might well be the second greatest batsman of all time (after Bradman) but the reason he averages just above 50 rather than around 60-65 is simply because he got out so often early before settling down. In that aspect two contemporaries of his time Kallis and Dravid had an excellent defence and so they had lesser no. of early failures even though they were quite defensive. Even Lara's good friend and adversary Tendulkar had a much better defence than him. Even Ponting had a little iffy defence when he started his innings; like Lara as he got set the defence got better. I didn't watch Viv live; so won't comment.

Stephen
on July 19, 2017, 17:23 GMT

England had four specialist batsman in the test - FOUR! Not rocket science. Play another batsman. Is there no one who averages over 40 at first class level?

michae7471641
on July 19, 2017, 17:30 GMT

I agree with these observations. It should also be emphasised that the management of this team could do a lot more to demonstrate that they value the skills exhibited in the county championship. I think it's absolutely disgraceful that Bayliss, by his own admission, has never seen either Stoneman or Westley bat. It sends out completely the wrong message when these players are relying on journalists and broadcasters to rally their personal causes. It also devalues the main domestic competition that most closely resembles Test cricket in England, which has become increasingly marginalised by shorter versions of the game that generate more income for the ECB. You reap what you sow.

Shay
on July 19, 2017, 17:45 GMT

SA are poor series starters. ENG Lords win was over exaggerated. Cook has always looked the deal

PJ
on July 19, 2017, 17:58 GMT

T20 is killing test cricket, on the field and off it.

When we all come clean on that we might at least have a sensible discussion about how to put it to sleep in the best manner possible.

GANESSIN
on July 19, 2017, 18:01 GMT

Eng lack quality when it comes to test batting. they dont have batsman averaging around 50 other than Root and Cook. They miss KP in this regards. Its a 2 batsmen team. Hence Root/Cook failures will come to haunt them. Root/Cook cant bail out the team in every match.

nmehal0608822
on July 19, 2017, 19:09 GMT

@SHAY when england won their 1st match in south afica,thry said saffas are poor starters.result=2-1 for wngland.when saffas lost their 1st match of ODIs and T20s ,this tour,you said saffas are poor starters and the result is 2-1 loss in both series.

ABOUT COOKIES

We use cookies to help make this website better, to improve our services and for advertising purposes. You can learn more about our use of cookies and change your browser settings in order to avoid cookies by clicking here. Otherwise, we'll assume you are OK to continue.